Seòmar agus comataidhean

You think that the topics that are coming forward are strong enough and good enough.

Yes.

I thank Lady Paton and Mr Garland for being here. The discussion is giving us some background on what are very complex ideas—as has just been discussed—while explaining them in a much more understandable way for the benefit of people who are looking for simplicity. Thank you, Mr Simpson. As I say, it is great that you are here, Lady Paton and Mr Garland.

Going back to the list of Scottish Law Commission reports that the Scottish Government is reported to be looking to legislate on during this parliamentary session, do you have any view on the order in which the reports should be pursued?

You mentioned cohabitation and damages for personal injury, which are areas that people may feel might affect them more. Although all the matters on the list could affect us all, those may feel more personal. In general, when people hear about what is going through the Scottish Parliament, they may feel that consideration of such issues speaks to them, and that is important. I am glad that you pointed those topics out—that is really worthwhile.

Are there any unimplemented SLC reports that you consider should take priority over those that the Scottish Government has highlighted? Do you have any particular hobby-horses that you would like to be taken forward?

Were you and the SLC involved in the Scottish Government’s discussions on its programme for the implementation of your reports?

That is interesting—thank you. It was clear, actually.

To my knowledge, none of us here has a medical qualification to be able to decide for our benefit—never mind anyone else’s—whether hypnotherapy could be used in that manner. On that basis, it is important that we take advice from experts in the field. As Paul Sweeney suggests, it would also be useful to invite health boards to give us their viewpoints and to tell us what they want and how they handle such issues. If we get expert opinions from health boards or someone else—through the clerks, please—that would give us a direction to go in, because otherwise we would have to accept that nothing can be done. I think that something could be done, but we just do not know yet.

I understand the argument about inviting the petitioner to come and make a statement. However, the petition raises no new substantive issues compared to the previous one from the same petitioner. Before we invite the petitioner to speak to us, it might be worth while asking him whether he has anything new to raise.

As someone who has been on litter picks quite recently, I am aware that many people of all ages—not just children—throw litter. Although people will congratulate and thank those who take part in a litter pick, the same area will be covered in litter again a week later. Someone is throwing litter; I do not know who. The best way to approach the subject is to increase children’s awareness of the damage that litter causes to their community, so I think that we can take something from the petition.

From our papers, I understand that

“A 12-week public consultation will take place at the end of this year, and the refreshed strategy will be published in early 2022.”

I hope that the development of that strategy will include people such as the petitioners, and I would like us to suggest that to the Scottish Government.

There should be a slowing down.